Rifle Scopes Army selects Sig Tango 6
- Thread starter deersniper
- Start date
Has to be SIG just dropping their pants and undercutting everyone like they did with the MHS.
The decision makes no sense unless you’re delibedatly trying to hold the boys back from being effective.
With such long engagement distances and the entire point of the DMR, a 1-6 just doesn’t give you the precision you need.
Nightforce 2.5-10x24/42, Leupold Mk6 3-18, Leupold Mk5 3.6-18 to name a few. Many lightweight and compact DMR scopes out there with mil based Reticles that should have been chosen.
The decision makes no sense unless you’re delibedatly trying to hold the boys back from being effective.
With such long engagement distances and the entire point of the DMR, a 1-6 just doesn’t give you the precision you need.
Nightforce 2.5-10x24/42, Leupold Mk6 3-18, Leupold Mk5 3.6-18 to name a few. Many lightweight and compact DMR scopes out there with mil based Reticles that should have been chosen.
If somebody could just make a 10" 1-30 @16.4oz we wouldn't have these issues. How fucking hard is it? We can do scifi stuff with DNA yet we can't make a 1-30.....In all honesty the 1-6 thing has me scratching my balls. Hope lots of muj die either way.
There isn't much hate against m&p, Primus is just approaching troll status around here. They are just as reliable as Glocks. Hundreds of thousands of rounds through hundreds of m&p pistols in my department have matched your experience.
Lol, exactly, it's a retarded internet commando argument that pro's know the answer to already. (It's 9mm by the way, WITH proper bonded hollowpoint bullet selection.)
That’s a can of worms man. .357 sig is part 40 and part 9mm. No way that argument ends well
Walked into work this week.
Dont know where it came from but there is a picture tacked on the white board of three FC headstamp .223 rounds two of which are missing primers.
Notice next to the pictures says these were found at the range this week and everyone should check there carried duty ammo for missing primers
Im looking at the rounds pictured and there are ejector swipes and obvious signs of firing and Im scratching my head hoping the fuck this did not come from the armorer.
Granted finding these might result in a concern about a certain lot of ammo but sending out a notice to have people mostly issued pistols check duty ammo for primers falling out is retarded.
The only hope is that someone found this on the internet and tried to create a PSA with their vast wealth of knowledge.
Last edited:
Are you channeling Colonel Cooper? That was his statement about 25ACP and while hilarious is sorta ... silly. I do not recall anyone ever volunteering to get shot with anything.
Weirdly, 7.62x25 has done surprisingly well against body armor. Better than 9mm or 45.
All jokes aside, I am squarely in the 9mm camp. So much so, I no longer own a 45. I do own a 10mm.
ILya
Just spent the day training recruits at our range. 8000 rounds of 9mm, half Glock, half m&p and no failures except for a bad primer in one of the Glocks...gasp! As for PSA's the full-time range guys gave me the latest run down...some Federal HST duty ammo (which is great) ended up with 10 rifle primers in a case of 1000 pistol rounds. Didn't go bang. Also an old gen 3 Glock in the holster went off because the slide rail was broken and allowed the striker to slip past the safety bar. Nothing against Glocks, just an interesting tidbit. The lead instructor with more LE/competitive shooting years than I have been alive said the m&p 2.0 is much better than the gen 1 in accuracy, trigger and even a bit better in reliability. He's a Glock guy but said he actually favors the m&p 2.0 currently. Nothing conclusive, just a couple more data points for those who care.
That’s a can of worms man. .357 sig is part 40 and part 9
i own all 3. I enjoy shooting all 3 but I carry 9mm. For me more is better. For duty I still carry .40.Are you channeling Colonel Cooper? That was his statement about 25ACP and while hilarious is sorta ... silly. I do not recall anyone ever volunteering to get shot with anything.
Weirdly, 7.62x25 has done surprisingly well against body armor. Better than 9mm or 45.
All jokes aside, I am squarely in the 9mm camp. So much so, I no longer own a 45. I do own a 10mm.
ILya
Im expecting a new gun soon.
We have M&P .45ACP currently.
I think its between 9mm Sig and M&P 2.0 in .45 ACP.
I hope the M&P 2.0 wins out.
Good luck, hope you do get the M&P. What Sig are they considering? And why would they issue a sig 9mm and a not an m&p 9?
We had to install clearing barrels at every cleaning station because of this issue with both brands. I used to get upset at the reduntant firearms policies but the lowest common denominator is a factor for us and the cousin agency that uses our range. Some people's stupidity astounds me.
P320. Someone probably read the Army is buying them.
Actually the P320 would probably be a nice service pistol. I'm not going to shit on it. I haven't tried it.
We had Sig 226s. They were a nice service pistol. I wasn't a fan of .40 cal nor DAK triggers but whatever they worked.
We went to the 226 DAKs from the standard double/single 226. Wish I had of shot that D/S more to determine whether or not I liked the Double/Single action and if it is the problem some claim it to be.
I reload for .45ACP so I shoot my M&P plenty with never an issue.
I'm less resistant to going 9mm as I actually broke down and bought a couple of them last year - a S&W 952 and an old Browning HI Power - a target pistol and a war relic.
If we go 9mm more impetus to buy a shell plate for my S1050.
Last edited:
I prefer 9mm but carry a department issued G35 in .40 only because all the nines were checked out. I was going to carry my HK p30 but the level 3 holster was back ordered. I’ll have to re qualify with the HK. But my ultimate goal is a HK MK 23 or USP elite in .45. Just because I can. If HK made a MK 23 in 9, I would buy it. I looove large metal framed guns, they shoot the nicest.Are you channeling Colonel Cooper? That was his statement about 25ACP and while hilarious is sorta ... silly. I do not recall anyone ever volunteering to get shot with anything.
Weirdly, 7.62x25 has done surprisingly well against body armor. Better than 9mm or 45.
All jokes aside, I am squarely in the 9mm camp. So much so, I no longer own a 45. I do own a 10mm.
ILya
From the standpoint of maintenance, there is no practical difference between M39 and 91/30. It is simply a matter of volume. Finns didn't have to make all that many rifles, so they paid more attention to each one.
As far as cosmopolitan Soviet education goes... that is a separate topic that I can definitely talk about. There is a lot more to hold than economics. I do agree that American educational system before college is sorta designed to make sure people learn as little as humanly possible in twelve years of schooling.
ILya
We are lucky, our Dept gives us money up front and we can choose whatever sidearm we want as long as it is an M&P, Glock or Springfield in 9 or 45, lol.
I prefer a plastic fantastic 9 for duty use, not messing with the da/sa is a plus, especially for recruits and officers who won't train more than the minimum few hundred rounds per year.
I will say the da/sa pull on the CZ shadow is phenomenal, but that's on a $2000 gun reworked by CZ customs.
It's .45 by the way, WITH proper bonded hollowpoint bullet selection. (sorry, I had to
)
Last edited:
Glock reliability... what a myth to constantly put their name to the forefront of that discussion. I had an M&P that ran like a fargin champ. Hell, I own a Taurus PT111 Gen 2 that I paid $200 for just to leave it in the center console of my truck, 1000 rounds and counting without a single hiccup..
From thousands of rounds downrange in USPSA and 3 Gun, I can honestly say, there are LOTS of very reliable handguns these days. I've seen Glocks malfunction and run like crap just as often as any other brand. It's certainly not very well favored amongst the competition crowd, that crown belongs to the 1911/2011 platform. Guys that compete with Glocks are usually using the only handgun they own, or shooting in the Glocks only competitions (or sponsored).
For LEO and military usage, it makes sense (along with lots of others). Just point and pull the trigger. Tolerances are sloppy enough that they run in adverse conditions and great accuracy isn't a must.
I would hope so. IPX7 water proofing, lol. I know that isn't the end-all, be-all, and very few of us will go diving with our scopes, but water resistance seems to be a pretty good measure of at least one aspect of optic durability. Also, I looked through a Tango6 back in 2017, and it was rather poor. I preferred the SWFA SS 1-6 for glass, if that means anything.
At least part of Glock's reputation comes from their EXCELLENT legal team. And that's all I want to say. Because they have an excellent legal team.
Somebody at the DOD probably has friends at Sig. Not sure how I feel about this, seems like a strange choice for the HK. Although they seem to be more worried about cqb and having low end on a scope. I can understand. They probably are thinking that the majority of engagements will be closer in. I bet that setup will be OK out to 6ish. In the right hands. Personally would like to have seen something a little more proven and bb proof to go on that HK.
I have seen a few Tango6 scopes and there was some variation initially, but they seemed to have stabilized things. As far as 1-6x scopes go, Tango6 is a very decent option right now.
Besides, as I said, the version going to the military is not identical to what is currently available from Sig commercially. I do expect the improvements to trickle down into their commercial models.
ILya
Agreed the rifles are the same if fit differently.
I vacationed in Helsinki 1988 on R&R from Moscow.
Spent a night at the house of a vet from the Winter War.
He spoke no English but had me drinking vodka from a small "fire extinguisher" at about 9 AM after attending Sauna with this family of strangers. The smoked salmon and other food was great. It was early December and the day was Finlands national holiday.
Anyway I dont think "Dad" was impressed with Marines but based on the combat that guy had been through I think he had a right to his standards.
Is there doubt that the average Finn conscript was different than the average CCCP conscript - taking into account the vast, diverse area that the CCCP comprised?
Was at a museum yesterday and prominently displayed was a plaque about Lauri Toni.
Now I dont take Lauri Toni as the "average" soldier regardless of national loyalty, and he had a few, but he approached his profession with a sense of focus people that need to fight just to survive the environment seem to have at birth.
It's .45 by the way, WITH proper bonded hollowpoint bullet selection. (sorry, I had to
It's .45 by the way, WITH proper bonded hollowpoint bullet selection. (sorry, I had to
Sure, if you like half the ammo per mag, and more recoil for the exact same energy and penetration. ?
Maybe I just grabbed a crappy one, but nothing about it impressed me in any way, from FOV, to reticle, to glass, to illumination.
Give it to a Marine, it will be pregnant in 3 .
I have read much of this thread, but not all. It is quite amusing.
we are talking a DMR here, not a sniper rifle.
Many of the DMR's are currently topped with a 4x Acog.
DMR's are not intended for long range engagements, typically 600 yards and in.
6X is absolutely sufficient for that (a good 1-8 would have been better).
1x is required as you may be involved in room clearing or CQB
Why a BDC? In combat with many targets, actively shooting at you from various ranges, you don't have time to dial.
We are also talking engaging a man sized target, not shooting tiny groups.
You can hit a man at 1000 yards using a 6x optic.
This is the military, in a military environment.
Basically, ANY hit is a successful engagement.
D
Deleted member 113831
Guest
I think the argument is not BDC reticle vs dialing, but rather BDC reticle vs small mrad gris. I can make a pretty decent argument that when going fast it is all the same, but when given time, you can do more with the mrad grid (something roughly similar to the ATACR 1-8x reticle.
ILya
Concur.
However, that requires additional training.
When you're talking the numbers, you're talking a huge investment in time and money. remember, you have to think like a bean counter, because bean counters rule over all acquisitions.
Much easier and to teach them to put the line marked as 400 on the target that is 400 yards away.
And there it is...the can of worms!!
I have some theories on that... Mag size, I can do anything I need to with 9 rounds, I have no use for more. Truth be told I have a very sound theory that large magazine capacity turns self defense encounters into a spray and pray. All rational thought leaves the head and is replaced by fight/flight and pulling the trigger as fast as possible. I've watched endless hours of video on firearm encounters, law enforcement and civilian. Rarely, as in hardly ever/never, is a large capacity magazine necessary. Either one of or both parties try to get away from each other when the shooting starts. Even LEO encounters where the bad guy is committed to the fight are over very quickly. Give a guy 9 rounds instead of 17 and the realization of that may very well sneak in through the fog and make a guy find his front sight and make good shots. I'm certainly not going to pull my 1911 and just start flinging shots at someone.
Recoil? I can put 9 rounds on a 20" plate at 21 feet damn near as fast with a 45 as I can a 9mm. Closer than that and it's how fast you can pull the trigger. But driving the gun fast "shouldn't" be the point. If someone is going to stand there while you shoot either gun as fast as you can, that fight will be over pretty quick.
Same energy? Neither pack a huge punch, they are too slow. Ideally you get decent penetration without pass through. The 45 does make a pretty decent sized wound channel..
Honestly, with modern defense ammo, both are good. I carry a 45 but have a 9mm in my truck and the house. I'm fine with either. It's just fun to see this argument in the scope section of Sniper's Hide
